5 ms·
Instagram comes to mind. 13 employees and $1B acquisition. Hard to imagine that without AWS.
by dumbfoundded 7y ago
Instagram comes to mind. 13 employees and $1B acquisition.
Hard to imagine that without AWS.
- jakear 7y agoWhatsApp? Similar story, no AWS.
- dumbfoundded 7y agoWell, WhatsApp was started by industry experts in scaling. If you're making a point about functional programming, I'd tend to agree but from a business perspective I'd look to why Netflix still uses AWS: https://www.quora.com/Why-does-Netflix-still-use-AWS https://www.quora.com/Why-does-Netflix-still-use-AWS
- gurrone 7y agoStill they place FreeBSD running on prem hardware in the ISP PoPs as a caching layer because it absolutely makes sense. https://papers.freebsd.org/2019/FOSDEM/looney-Netflix_and_FreeBSD.files/FOSDEM_2019_Netflix_and_FreeBSD.pdf https://papers.freebsd.org/2019/FOSDEM/looney-Netflix_and_Fr...
- cupofsludge 7y agoI think people tend to forget how often WhatsApp experienced outages in the early days.
- jakear 7y agoThis actually speaks volumes. Yes, people forget. Yes, it’s possible to suffer severe growing pains and still get acquired for $$$$. No, you don’t need to start with everything-AWS to ensure 99.9-whatever% uptime. People forget.
- nine_k 7y agoAn $1B acquisition may have nothing to do with any colossal infrastructure. Was it indeed colossal?
- dumbfoundded 7y agoI don't know what you'd consider colossal but the migration doesn't sound fun: https://www.wired.com/2014/06/facebook-instagram/ https://www.wired.com/2014/06/facebook-instagram/
- vidarh 7y agoWhy? Sharding and caching blob storage and activity feeds for Instagram type sites is among the easiest category of sites to scale.